Explained | The proposal for mandatory seatbelt warning systems for rear seat passengers

The story so far: On September 19, the Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways (MoRTH) issued a draft proposal seeking comments on the mandatory installation of seatbelt reminders for occupants in the rear seats of vehicles in the M1 category (used for carrying passengers with not more than eight seats).

The proposal was floated against the backdrop of former Tata Sons Chairman Cyrus Mistry’s demise in a car crash earlier this month. PTI had earlier reported that Mr Mistry was seated unbuckled in a rear seat of the vehicle. He was thrown forward at great velocity as the speeding car rammed into a divider.

MoRTH’s latest proposal also comes a fortnight after the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) sent notices to e-commerce websites to stop the sale of devices designed to disable car seat belt alarms. As per news agency Reuters, this was based on a complaint received by MoRTH in May this year. 

What is a ‘safety-belt reminder’? What does the legislation propose? 

A ‘safety-belt reminder’ (also known as seatbelt alarms/warning systems) alerts the driver when either s/he or any other occupant inside the vehicle has not fastened their seatbelt. At present, it is mandatory for all automakers to provide seatbelt reminders for front-seat passengers. The proposal would thus extend the same to occupants in the rear seats as well. 

The primary purpose of the warning system is to inform the driver of the unfastened occupant, so that s/he is able to request them to buckle up. In a related context, online cab-aggregators Uber and Ola sent out an advisory to their driver partners that urged the latter to ensure that seatbelts at the rear are accessible and functional to passengers. 

The warning systems combine two concepts—effectiveness and annoyance. The warning is designed to both be noticeable to the occupant as well as to motivate them to fasten their belts. However, as pointed out by the United States’ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the system must not be so intrusive that an occupant will circumvent or disable it. 

As per MoRTH’s proposal, an occupant is deemed unbuckled when either the safety-belt buckle is not engaged or the webbing length (in other words, the harness pulled out of the retractor) is less than 100 mm or less.  

Warnings would be engaged at two stages. The first-level warning willbe activated when the ignition switch is engaged irrespective of whether the vehicle’s engine is running or not. It must compulsorily comprise of a minimum 4-second visual warning in case the occupants do not have their seatbelts fastened. The second-level warning would work in tandem with the initial warning should the driver start operating the vehicle ignoring the warning. While the audio warning is optional at the first level, it must accompany the visual warning at the second level.

Further, several international bodies including the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) have pointed out that should a vocal warning be employed, the manufacturers shouldensure that is in the local language of the geographical region into which it is to be sold. It also said that for vehicles without occupant detection (system determining if a seat is occupied or not), the visual signal must clearly indicate both unfastened and fastened seatbelts to the driver.  

What is the case for a rear seat belt?  

As per the World Health Organisation (WHO), wearing a seatbelt reduces the risk of death among drivers and front seat occupants by 45 to 50%, and the risk of death and serious injuries for rear seat passengers by 25%. Further, a forensic investigation of car crashes on highways in the year 2021 by SaveLIFE Foundation, a not-for-profit organisation working for road safety in India, showed that 35% of the investigated fatalities occurred because of not wearing seatbelts in the rear seat. 

Adherence to safety protocols takes even more of a back seat when the distance is smaller, or the commute is routine. 

Unbuckled passengers are over-represented in a car crash; in other words, there is an enhanced probability of them striking the vehicle’s interior. Wearing a seatbelt in the rear seat would ensure that occupants do not receive a blow from the front seat-cushion or the sides. It helps keep the passenger stationary, in turn decelerating them in situations where the vehicle experiences a sudden and high thrust of velocity and force because of a crash. 

It is important to note that airbags alone cannot provide protection. They must be accompanied by seatbelts and not be deemed an alternative to wearing belts. In a crash-like situation, unbuckled occupants can potentially be thrown into a rapidly inflating airbag that could cause injuries or even death. It is imperative that the seatbelt holds the passenger at the optimal distance for airbags to cushion him/her. 

Speaking about vehicular safety, President of the Federation of Automobile Dealers Associations (FADA) Manish Raj Singhania told The Hindu that government investments in improving the road infrastructure has increased the usage of personal mobility. He adds, “With this, there is an increased risk exposure, and thus the requirement for an even safer vehicle. To increase public awareness of the need for safety, the automobile sector must prioritize safety in their production processes and take ownership of this obligation.” 

According to him, the proposed move could help raise the quality of Indian manufactures and make them stand at par in terms of quality with their global peers.  

Would the move promote uptake of rear seatbelts? 

Rule 138 (3) of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 already mandates the use of seatbelts for rear passengers too. However, as observed by Piyush Tewari, Founder and CEO of SaveLIFE Foundation, “This legal framework requires due awareness and proper enforcement by State governments in order to be effective and meet its goal of saving lives.”  

About the proposed move to introduce rear seatbelt reminders and the ban on deactivating devices, he agreed that it will “serve as a nudge towards better safety behaviour by vehicle occupants.” 

The United States’ Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) puts forth a similar observation. According to them, the use of rear seatbelts is higher in U.S. States with primary enforcement of laws that mandate both front and rear seatbelts as compared to States that only mandate seatbelts for those in the front. 

Mr Singhania observes that India has a thriving market with budget-conscious consumers that is also receptive to change should the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Among these changes are technologies that improve the driving experience as well as those that make vehicles safer.  

Addressing concerns about a potential price hike emanating from the move, the FADA President stated that these measures would not have a large impact on the cost of a vehicle. He added, “The cost can be easily consumed by the manufacturer, even if not; it will have a very nominal impact on the price of the vehicle, if compared to the advantage it adds to a precious human life.”